Legal Opinion

Meadowbrook Ctr., Inc. v. Buchman

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided February 1, 2017PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

The plaintiff's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 169 Conn. App. 527, 151 A.3d 404 (2016), is granted, limited to the following issue:

"Did the Appellate Court properly rule that the time limitation contained in the rules of practice governing motions for attorney's fees in Practice Book § 11-21 is directory and not mandatory?"

PALMER, J., did not participate in the consideration of or decision on this petition.

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Meadowbrook Center, Inc. v. BuchmanConnecticut Appellate Court · 2016

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Meadowbrook Ctr., Inc. v. BuchmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2018